“These players got nobody to blame but themselves. …It’s a fair rule. I thought it should’ve been 70 \[games\].” Chuck on the NBA’s 65-game qualification requirement for postseason awards.
I agree with Barkley. This is supposed to be an 82-game season. Now sure, if a guy is injured, that’s not his fault he is missing games. But still, IMO it is hard to justify someone as MVP or DPOY or any other award if they miss 20% of the season. That’s a lot of games with zero productivity that have to be factored in to their stats, I think.
Source: [https://twitter.com/NBAonTNT/status/1753453621503508728](https://twitter.com/NBAonTNT/status/1753453621503508728)
by Kimber80
26 Comments
70 games and you are not allowed to sit out for rest on national televised games if you are healthy.
Draymond made a tit of himself on his podcast when he said “The players before this didn’t have to deal with this rule” Yer mate, that’s literally every rule that’s been brought in.
It was an agreed provision during the collective bargaining agreement. They really should be expressing more frustration with the Union if so many disagree with the rule they bargained into.
It’s dumb how hot of a discussion this is. If a guy can’t play 75% of the season he shouldn’t be a threat for awards anyway. That was true before the new 65 game qualifier
Chuck is right about this. Can’t be the most valuable player if you are playing less than 80% of your games every year
Russilo had a pretty good take on this.
THe league had to do something so that they’d get paid when the next tv deal comes up.
How big the entire pie is, which the players get 51% of, is more important than how much the richest players get paid.
That 40 million dollars that Tyrese Halliburton isn’t getting paid is going to go to some other players. Whatever bonuses Embiid misses out on because he doesn’t get in All-NBA will go to someone else.
In that sense the rule is good for the league, and good for the vast majority of players, which is why the NBPA agreed to it. It represents all the players, not just the top players.
Any player complaining against his that isn’t directly affected is being short-sighted. If anything they need to be stricter in the implementation so that Halliburton can’t get away with playing 22 minutes and have it count.
If I missed 20% of my shifts I’d be fired. Lmao.
I don’t like how it ties to salaries and all-NBA, but I do like the rule as an incentive to play – especially for fans.
>”These players got nobody to blame but themselves. …It’s a fair rule. I thought it should’ve been 70 [games].”
Now do Tony Snell
The only real issue with this rule is that contracts are decided based on these awards. Journalists should not be deciding how much money players make.
i have absolutely 0 problem with this.
​
Only because it’s not like their contracts or guaranteed $ will be deducted lol. Players fked around and people (ticker buyers) were getting victimized so NBA had to force a hand on this one.
​
There wouldn’t be a rule or something if they would have behaved in the first place.
I think a lot of this would be solved if they just divided all stats for the season by 82 regardless of games played. That is the number of games you COULD HAVE played which is the important number.
Something about the way modern American players come up makes them injury prone in a way past players weren’t. This isn’t about toughness.
​
There are theories but nothing is proven:
​
The modern NBA has a lot more maximum speed change of direction than it did in the past. This doesn’t mean past players didn’t run or anything, but the game is much more spread out. For example, players are now expected to help and recover from the NBA 3 point line and back. If you watch an 80s or 90s game, a lot of help defense still came from players with one foot in the key.
​
Modern players are more muscular than their past equivalents, adding more weight and therefore more stress to their lower bodies when they move
​
Modern players play a lot more games in their youth, 12 months a year, leading them to get joint and muscle overuse injuries at a younger age than before (this has been reported by many orthopedic surgeons)
​
​
I don’t think these things should be a reason to revoke the 65 game rule, but I think Barkley and the other old heads thinking modern players are soft when that is really just a lazy conclusion that ignores how different the road to becoming an NBA player is now than it used to be.
​
I think 82 games a year is too many, if the goal is to have the best product, night in and night out. Especially when you look at the injury rates of players in seasons following a deep playoff run.
Be available to work 80% of the time to be eligible for your bonus. I wish MY job were that lenient. 🤣
can’t play 65 games and then cry about not getting paid extra because they’re ineligible for awards.
There are people that argue against this?
Not sure if we should blame the players, coaches, or front office (since I assume the majority of load management stuff is coming from the coaches or GM’s instead of the players), but it’s damn sure not the NBA’s fault for trying to get their millionaire players to play when they aren’t hurt.
Extremely common Chuck W. How can you be rewarded as one of the best players if you don’t play? Doesn’t matter how talented a guy is if he’s not helping his team win. You could literally be the smartest person on earth, but you’re not going to win a Nobel prize unless you actually do some work.
This is a problem with removing physicicality. You have more stress on the joints and ligaments. Back in the day, you might catch an elbow or bang your knee, but now the sport is just too fast.
This was bargained on and ratified by the NBPA. Maybe they made a bad deal, but it’s still the deal they made, and not particularly long ago. So I agree, they can’t really blame anyone else.
Is Barkley also the one that pointed out how basically every other sport credits the league leaders as the players with the most total in a given statistical category vs. the NBA doing everything on a per game basis?
Should be all 82 games. You miss a game and you’re out of any consideration for any awards.
How valuable are you if you don’t play?
yeah rule is good. games matter was also something people factor in. now its concreate instead of being subjective. 80% of games should be simple. injuries are part of the game, its bad luck if you missed. we shouldnt use outlier scenarios to justify changing the rule to help one- two guys. the constant resting was worse for the league .
Simple fix, just make all the stats weighted for a 82 game season. Guys who who miss a game will have a 0 hit their scoring average
The real issue is supermaxes being tied to awards. That should have never been a thing.
It’s just wild to me that Embiid is in first place for the scoring title despite only having the 7th most points this year.